[aur-general] TU Application -Thomas Hatch

Kaiting Chen kaitocracy at gmail.com
Wed Jan 5 14:37:42 EST 2011


On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 2:11 PM, Thomas S Hatch <thatch45 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hijack away, as long as I get the vote :)
>
> So the big difference with MooseFS is that it will run on commodity
> hardware
> and can be set up by a monkey.
> So you don't need hardware HPC equipment, just a bunch of computers with
> hard drives. This means it can scale and works well for both small and very
> large deployments.
> I set it up to test it on just a couple of virtual machines and it ran like
> a dream, and it also runs like a dream on my company's 165 TB setup
> supporting over 12 million files.
>
> There are a lot of other differences, but all in all, MooseFS is much MUCH
> more KISS than Lustre, effectively delivers the same product, is very fast
> for a distributed file system and is a snap to set up!
> Grab a couple of machines and try it out!
>

Oh God it's FUSE. One more question then, how does it compare with
GlusterFS? Which is also easy to set up, runs on FUSE, and can use commodity
hardware. Thanks, --Kaiting.

-- 
Kiwis and Limes: http://kaitocracy.blogspot.com/


More information about the aur-general mailing list